Aryan95614/aerograph-asrs huggingface dataset:
Aircraft: B767
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

Upon returning to the cockpit from first break; the Captain provided me with the standard relief pilot change briefing. After that; he told me about an anomaly that they experienced upon coasting out at RESNO. Evidently; after executing R1 the FMC dropped the active waypoint and the aircraft turned right to intercept the offset in LNAV. The aircraft did not intercept the outbound course and continued to turn to the north. Both pilots recognized the anomaly and quickly intervened with HDG SEL keeping the aircraft well within GNE limits. They noted that the active waypoint was N5430 and redirected the aircraft to N5520 which had dropped out of the FMC. After confirming that the aircraft was back on track and navigating properly; the clearance was reconfirmed with both EGGX and Shanwick. The three of us formally debriefed after the flight and later the Captain provided us with feedback on NAV anomalies. Upon coast out at Resno; we entered an offset of R1; the FMC then dropped the next waypoint and never caught the offset (LNAV course) and continued to turn to the right. We put the aircraft to HDG SEL to stay on course and had to reinstall the next waypoint N5520. Needless to say all class II procedures were followed; and the routing prior to coast out was confirmed at least three times. The aircraft began heading to the North; and should have headed to the SW towards the now ACTIVE waypoint of N5430; it should have been navigating to N5520; (N5520 had dropped out). We were well within GNE limits; however we did need to confirm routing with EGGX as they called us not more than a minute later. We were very busy entering the proper course and navigating the aircraft in the correct direction. We advised Shanwick to standby while we BOTH re-entered the correct routing and course. Once we corrected course; we then called Shanwick back. We had just been switched over to the HF frequencies with Shanwick control and had just tuned in HF 8879. Shanwick simply wanted to confirm our routing after RESNO. We believe this to be an anomaly. The aircraft turned North off course and dropped out the next waypoint. Please research. Further inquiry revealed possible anomalies in the Pegasus FMC/honeywell data base. B767 flight crew reported upon coast out at RESNO an offset of R1 is entered and the FMC dropped the next waypoint. The FMC never caught the offset (LNAV course) and continued to turn to the right. The next waypoint had dropped from the FMC.
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Phase of flight: Initial Approach
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT

After being cleared for the visual approach and landing into ZZZ on Runway XX; we continued to configure the aircraft for landing. We proceeded to descend below 3;000 just inside the ZZZZZ fix. As we turned final around 2;600 feet MSL around 1;300 AGL we received a 'Obstacle' GWPS warning which we were given an RA to pull up. I immediately complied with the command until it confirmed and we visually confirmed that we were clear and continued the approach to land without incident. During the incident we did not observe nor did Tower observe any obstacles that we were in close proximity to. We maintained proper clearance of at least 1;000 feet AGL from all of the published towers that were on the approach plate.Cause - There were no noted obstacles that were within 1;000 feet AGL clearance and can only come to the conclusion that it was an anomaly with the GWPS system. At 2;800 feet we had turned inside the Tower that was 1;740 feet and turned well before the Tower at 1;809 maintain safe and legal separation from structures.Suggestions - Continue to follow protocol and respect a Resolution Advisory. EMB-175 Captain reported receiving an Obstacle GWPS warning followed by a 'Pull up' RA command during a visual approach; which was followed by the crew. The Captain stated it was most likely a GPWS anomaly that triggered the warnings as no problem obstacles were noted.
Aircraft: B777
Phase of flight: Parked
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue

Shortly after arriving at the aircraft a mechanic came to the cockpit and stated they needed to do some work because the fueler couldn't get the correct amounts in the tanks due to fuel shutoff valves closing. This isn't unheard of so I was not concerned. After stepping back to say hi to the flight attendants I saw the mechanics had opened the equipment access hatch in first class. This I have never seen before to work a fuel transfer issue; but again I wasn't concerned.Shortly afterwards the fuel issue was resolved and the fuel sheet was brought to the cockpit. At this point I noticed the fuel load of Left 63.1 Center 118.0 Right 63.1. I took note of it because it was exact (left and right) this is unusual but good; I thought to myself the mechanics did a perfect job!About 45 minutes later when preparing for the before push checklist I noticed the fuel was now 2000 lbs lower in the left tank and 2000 lbs higher in the center tank. Also after my before push flow the center right fuel pump should have load shed but this time it didn't. Right away I thought something in the fuel system is still set to transfer fuel or was left 'connected' between the left main and the center tank.After having maintenance come back out to the aircraft they looked the plane over made some adjustments (I am not sure what exactly they did) the fuel was again balanced and the center right fuel pump now load shed like it should.At this point we believed the issue was corrected. We then taxied for takeoff. After takeoff when passing 10;000 an IRO (International Relief Officer) asked what was happening with the fuel. We brought the fuel synoptic up and shockingly the left tank was now 3000 lbs higher than it was at the gate.We decided the best course of action was to get up to altitude before an in-depth discussion. After getting close to cruise the Captain called Dispatch and [Maintenance] on the satellite phone and I was in charge of flying and talking to ATC. The Captain; with input from the IROs; Dispatch; and [Maintenance] attempted to understand and remedy the situation. After quite a while it became apparent that none of the crew was comfortable taking the aircraft over the Pacific Ocean like it was.We elected to return to [departure airport] for further maintenance work. The crew was also not comfortable jettisoning fuel which would open more valves and further complicate what we considered an 'unknown' fuel system. By now we had the system burning out of the center tank and decided to use delaying vectors altitude and landing gear to increase our burn to a weight we were comfortable with.After arriving at that weight we conducted the arrival and made an uneventful overweight landing. B777 First Officer reported returning to departure airport after experiencing fuel system anomalies.
Aircraft: COMMERCIAL FIXED WING
Phase of flight: Landing
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance

After receiving clearance from approach for visual approach Runway XXC; I was advised to stay with approach until ZZZZZ (Final approach fix) and then call Tower frequency. Landing checklist was completed; and we were stable at 1;000 feet. I was the Captain and pilot monitoring. The weather was day VFR -clear visibility and a crosswind wind gusting to 22 knots. After landing I realized that I forgot to switch the frequency to receive landing clearance. After clearing the runway; I contact tower and apologized. I was told by Tower that they gave me the green light as landing clearance.I always try to verbalize my landing clearance as technique and check the landing lights/ turn off lights position as required. For some reason I didn't do it this time. I'm not sure if the frequency switch location in conjunction with landing check list procedures was the reason for forgetting to switch to Tower. I take full responsibility and will learn to pay better attention in the future. I was pilot flying in VFR conditions. The Approach Controller vectored us to join the final approach for [Runway] XXC between the course fix and final fix. He also cleared us for the approach and instructed us to contact Tower at the final fix. Upon capturing the localizer and as we intercepted the glideslope outside the final fix; I called for final flaps and landing checklist. We set the missed approach altitude and started down the glide slope. I used the autopilot until below 1;000 feet then hand flew the aircraft to landing in a crosswind. After landing; as we approached our anticipated exit from the runway; the Captain (pilot monitoring) queried ATC for exit/taxi instructions when we realized we had not switched to Tower or received a landing clearance. We immediately contacted Tower [and were told we] were cleared to land. We continued to parking without further incident. Traffic was light and weather was clear. Our actions did not disrupt any other operations/aircraft.This was my first operational leg after having been off for a month. I was so focused on my flying duties and landing in a crosswind I forgot to confirm we had received landing clearance. Contacting Tower at the final fix is a very routine action; yet was overlooked/missed by all crew members in this situation. Not exactly sure why I failed to confirm landing clearance except perhaps I was too fixated on the aviating and failed to communicate. Air Carrier flight crew reported they forgot to receive clearance to land. First Officer reported this was the first flight after an extended period of time off.
Aircraft: B727-200
Phase of flight: Climb
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical

On climbout during acceleration passing 4;000 FT; Engineer informed the rest of the crew that we had a Lower Aft Body Overheat light illuminated. I continued to fly while he and the Captain ran the QRH. We leveled at 13;000 FT and when it was determined that the light was not going to go out; we turned back for the [departure airport]. Captain declared emergency. Landing was uneventful; fire crew checked the airplane with IR sensors and we terminated to emergency and taxied in. The light finally extinguished when ALL engines were shut down. B727 First Officer reported receiving a Lower Aft Body Overheat warning on initial climb. Flight crew ran the procedure; declared an emergency; and returned to departure airport.
Aircraft: B777
Phase of flight: Final Approach
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown

ATC vectors kept us high (4;200 MSL) until approximately 7 miles from the runway. We were cleared to 2;000 MSL; and then cleared for a visual approach. Upon descent from 2;000 MSL; ATC advised that he had a low altitude alert. We climbed slightly and continued the approach. Upon turning final at about a two mile final; we were on the visual glide path as shown by the P-VASIs. No EGPWS alerts were encountered; terrain was not a factor. In our opinion; we were intercepting a normal descent profile for landing after having been kept high until very close to the runway. [We were] cleared visual approach. [We] descended to remain clear of clouds. Approach gave callout 'too low terrain' over radio. Acknowledged the call and clarified cleared for the visual approach. They confirmed clearance and a few moments later again the same callout. We again told them we are VMC and continued our approach. The call confused the aircrew at what ATC wanted the crew to do. Both myself and the pilot flying did not understand what ATC wanted us to do. The landing was accomplished uneventfully. A B777 flight crew was advised of a low altitude alert by ATC on approach; causing some confusion in the cockpit.
Aircraft: BONANZA 36
Phase of flight: Landing; Taxi
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway

I was acting as pilot (PIC) of my bonanza BE36; with my neighbor as co-pilot; on an IFR. My co-pilot was handling radio transmissions and requested and cleared for the ILS approach by Approach. We were then instructed to contact tower. When the co-pilot contacted tower; we were on a 5 - 6 mile final on the ILS approach. Tower informed us that we were number 2 following a Skyhawk and cleared us to land runway 14. The co-pilot then read back our landing instructions which included our call sign. The landing roll took us past taxiway D and I was slowing the aircraft to decide which taxiway to exit for [FBO]. By now; I was approaching runway 4 and the co-pilot turned to the right in time to see a Twin Piper on take-off roll. Since there are no brakes on the right; the co-pilot told me to STOP!! STOP!! STOP!! When I stopped; the aircraft was inside of the runway 04 edge line. I immediately turned to my right; and saw the Twin Piper on take-off roll. Coinciding with the above; the tower instructed the Twin Piper to abort the take-off. The pilot of the Twin aircraft did not abort the take-off; did not acknowledge the towers instruction to abort the take-off and became airborne. The twin passed us with approximately three feet of altitude and within fifteen feet of the nose of our Bonanza. By the time the abort take-off was issued by the tower; a collision with the Twin Piper would have been inevitable had we not stopped. Both the speed of the Twin and his lack of altitude when passing in front of us; only reaffirms my opinion that a collision would have been unavoidable. We were then given runway exit instructions by the tower to initially turn right onto runway 04. This was then amended to continue to taxiway Bravo; right turn. Ground control then cleared us to taxi to [FBO] via Taxiway Alpha; hold short Runway 04 - 22. We were then given clearance to cross runway 4; and proceed to [FBO].The tower should never have issued a take-off clearance to an aircraft departing a crossing runway without issuing and receiving confirmation of a land and hold short instruction of that crossing runway to landing aircraft. [Report narrative contained no additional information.] Bonanza 36 pilots reported that after landing; they had to make a sudden stop due to an aircraft taking off on a crossing runway.
Aircraft: COMMERCIAL FIXED WING
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle

I was working Ground Control 1 when Aircraft X notified me that an airlines [ground vehicle] came into contact with their right scimitar winglet. The incident happened while Aircraft X was taxiing eastbound on taxiway 1 just east of taxiway 5. I reached out to city operations; who typically monitor the frequency. I was not able to reach city operations; and neither was the Controller in Charge. I noticed Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) vehicles in the area so I reached out on the emergency frequency and got hold of ARFF-2 and send them to investigate. A few minutes later; city operations came on frequency and I advised them what happened. While moving traffic around the incident; I noticed that planes were not departing. I asked Traffic Management Unit (TMU) about it; as they had not informed me of their intentions. He said that departures were stopped. I asked why had I not been informed and he stated 'you should have known.'It seems like there are more issues with [ground vehicle] than there should be. A more rigorous training program may be in order.Also; TMU needs to be more active in the communication of their positions and advise everybody of their intentions. Ground Controller reported aircraft report of contact by vehicle; and lack of communication with city operations and the TMU.
Aircraft: ANY UNKNOWN OR UNLISTED AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURER
Phase of flight: Climb; Cruise; Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

I was working with weather coming in from the west moving east. Military airspace was active up to FL500. There were aircraft coming from the west deviating towards the active military airspace. The traffic load was heavy and made traffic complexity high because there was more than normal traffic coming from the west at even altitudes that were tied up with southbound traffic at even altitudes trying to go through the same 15 mile hole in between the weather and active military airspace. When weather is pushing toward the active military airspace we need to slow traffic down for deviations and have a plan to go-around the airspace and weather. ZJX Center Controller reported a complex traffic workload due to weather deviations and insufficient traffic flow management through their airspace.
Aircraft: C210
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence

I was in the co-pilot seat of this VFR flight. The pilot had successfully completed one touch and go; and was taking off from the second one. A strong gust of wind pushed the aircraft towards the right side of the runway; and eventually the right tire went off of the pavement; and into the softer soil. The pilot was utilizing crosswind technique; but it didn't help keep the aircraft on the runway. The soft; somewhat grassy soil caused the aircraft to slow and eventually the nose wheel dug in and brought the aircraft to a quick stop. With this quick stop; it tipped up on its nose; and then settled back on all three wheels.Both occupants had shoulder and seat belts on; and no one received any injuries at all. One blade of the prop appears to be bent from the aircraft tipping on its nose. A local person on the airport helped to move the aircraft out of the soft soil and onto the runway. It was then towed to a nearby hangar; where it will be inspected and repaired. No lights or anything on the airport received any kind of damage. I believe the gusty winds contributed heavily to the pilot's problem of keeping the aircraft on the runway. The PIC (Pilot in Command) has received many hours of instruction in this aircraft; and was current as per CFR 61.56 and CFR 61.57.Because this incident doesn't meet the requirements of 49 CFR 830; no report but this one will be filed. Observer pilot reported a runway excursion due to a strong gust of wind.
Aircraft: SMALL TRANSPORT; LOW WING; 2 TURBOPROP ENG
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Aircraft inbound to UDD IFR. Developmental was busy working numerous IFR arrivals into PSP. Aircraft was cleared down to 7;000 [FT] and assigned vector 110 for descent. Pilot kept asking for lower due to moderate turbulence descending out of 10;000 [FT]. The developmental responded that due to the MVA he could expect lower in 3 miles. The pilot then responded that he would need lower as soon as we could give him a descent. The developmental then issued a vector of 180 heading to get the aircraft out 7;000 MVA. When the aircraft was south of the 7;000 MVA; the developmental gave a descent clearance to 6;000 [FT] anticipating the aircraft would miss the next lower MVA of 6;500 [FT] into the 6;000 MVA 2 miles south of the 6;500 MVA. Unfortunately the aircraft clipped the 6;500 MVA at 6;200 [FT] on the descent. I discussed with the developmental that in the future when aircraft are getting bumped around and having problems holding altitude; to keep in mind that as soon as that descent clearance is issued the pilot will be quick with the descent. Hold off on the descent as long as possible. As on OJTI; remain a little more aware of the developmental control instructions in adverse IFR conditions to ensure all MVA's are met. SCT TRACON Controller reported a Developmental Controller issued descent to an aircraft too early; which caused aircraft to violate the MVA rule.
Aircraft: SMALL AIRCRAFT; LOW WING; 1 ENG; FIXED GEAR
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

I was taking off from an uncontrolled airport with a 30 foot wide runway; length 4;800 FT; density altitude about 8;000. The (unpublished) preferred calm wind runway is 27. There is a 1% upward slope on 27; and there was a slight wind from the east; so taking off on 9 would have been plausible. I had just flown with a resident of the airpark about a half hour earlier (under similar wind); and he said he recommended 27 with such a light wind. The RV-9A I was flying has enough performance to take off in about a third of the runway length in these circumstances; but other; lower performance aircraft might well elect Runway 9. I monitored CTAF while taxiing and don't recall hearing any calls. I announced before entering 27 that I was departing 27: 'XXX traffic; YYY departing Runway 27; northbound departure XXX.' I didn't hear any radio calls; and I didn't see anyone in the pattern or on the runway. On takeoff roll; with nose wheel off the runway; maybe 50 KTS; I thought I saw something in the distance in front of me - a silhouette; no lights. Two or three seconds later; I discerned the aircraft heading toward me on Runway 9; maybe 20 FT AGL. I couldn't tell if it was landing or taking off. I lifted off and made an immediate right turn to get away from the centerline - while I was in the turn; maybe two to three seconds after lifting off; the opposing aircraft passed me opposite direction and made a radio call: 'Copter XXXX [didn't catch the number] - traffic now in sight.' With such a narrow runway; not knowing whether the oncoming aircraft was landing or taking off; and not familiar with copters; I felt that aborting my takeoff was not a good option. I don't know if he made a call that I missed (either due to the geography; or I just didn't hear it); or if he just turned his radio on after my call. I'm not sure how to interpret the other aircraft's call; 'now in sight.' It is possible the other pilot interpreted my radio call to mean I had already taken off and was in the process of leaving the area to the north - if this is how my call was interpreted; the pilot could have concluded the runway was unoccupied. My radio call could have been clearer: 'XXX traffic; YYY departing 27; planning right turnout; north departure XXX.' The use of 'planning' in the call might have kept the other pilot; if he was on frequency; from assuming I was already clear to the north. The pilot of a single engine aircraft departed 1N1 Runway 27 after making CTAF traffic calls and took evasive action from a small helicopter taking off on Runway 9 but not making traffic calls.
Aircraft: CITATION X (C750)
Phase of flight: Cruise
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor

Over Gulf of Mexico at 40;000 ft flight crew noticed strong burning smell in cabin. Performed smoke in cabin checklist. Advised ATC diverted to nearest airport. Smell dissipated after approx 5 minutes. Landed safely. CE-750 Captain reported detecting a strong burning smell at FL400 and diverts to the nearest suitable airport. The burning smell dissipated after about five minutes.